Alphabeta Math
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

✓ 27 results · all verified · 23 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 4 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Distributions Integral Manifolds and the Frobenius Theorem

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page treats a smooth distribution as a constant-rank smooth vector subbundle of the tangent bundle, separates integrability from involutivity, and proves the Frobenius theorem in both its local-coordinate and maximal-leaf forms. The local half runs through framed distributions, bracket closure, and a commuting-frame coordinate lemma; the global half builds leaves from flat-chart plaques instead of from the ambient subspace topology.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Smooth distributions on a manifold

Definition

Assume ACω, so that TM carries the canonical smooth vector bundle structure supplied by Assuming countable choice, the tangent bundle has a canonical smooth 2n-manifold structure. Let M be a smooth manifold and let k≥0 be an integer. A smooth distribution of rank k on M is a rank-k smooth vector subbundle D⊆TM.

Equivalently, to each p∈M it assigns a k-dimensional linear subspace Dp⊆TpM, with the dependence on p smooth in the sense of vector subbundles.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

A smooth distribution is exactly a locally framed constant-rank family of tangent spaces

Statement

Let p↦Dp⊆TpM be a rank-k family of tangent subspaces on a smooth manifold M. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. D is a smooth distribution.
  2. Every point of M has a neighborhood U and smooth vector fields X1,…,Xk on U such that the vectors X1(q),…,Xk(q) are linearly independent and span Dq for all q∈U.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A rank-k family p↦Dp⊆TpM.

[A1]

In item 1, smoothness means that D is a rank-k smooth vector subbundle of TM.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Assume D is a smooth distribution. By the local description of a [given] subbundle, each point has a neighborhood U and a frame of TM∣U whose first k members already frame D∣U. Those first k sections are smooth vector fields, pointwise independent, and span the prescribed subspaces.

1.2givenalgebra

Conversely, assume such local vector fields exist near every point. On a [given] neighborhood U where X1,…,Xk are pointwise independent, their span is a rank-k subbundle of TM∣U, because in a local trivialization of TM the columns formed by the Xi have rank k everywhere. Since that subbundle has fibres exactly Dq, the family is a smooth distribution on U.

2.1given

The two implications establish the equivalence. [given] ∎

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Vector fields tangent to a distribution

Definition

Let D be a smooth distribution on M. A smooth vector field X on M is tangent to D when Xp∈Dp for every p∈M.

The set of all smooth vector fields tangent to D is denoted Γ(D).

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Local sections of a distribution are freely generated by a local frame

Statement

Let D be a rank-k smooth distribution on M.

  1. Γ(D) is a C∞(M)-submodule of the module of smooth vector fields on M.
  2. If U⊆M carries a local frame X1,…,Xk of D, then every Y∈Γ(D∣U) has a unique expression Y=∑i=1kfiXi with smooth functions fi on U.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A rank-k smooth distribution D on M.

[A1]

Fix an open set U on which D has a local frame X1,…,Xk.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

If Y,Z∈Γ(D) and f,g∈C∞(M), then [given] (fY+gZ)p=f(p)Yp+g(p)Zp lies in the linear subspace Dp for every p. Hence Γ(D) is closed under addition and smooth scalar multiplication.

1.2given

On U, the vectors X1(q),…,Xk(q) form a basis of Dq, [given] so each Yq∈Dq has unique coefficients fi(q) with Yq=∑ifi(q)Xi(q). Because Y and the frame fields are smooth, those coefficients are smooth on U.

2.1given∎

Therefore the assignment U↦Γ(D∣U) is locally free [given] of rank k: on every frame domain its section module is freely generated by that frame. This is a statement about the sheaf of local sections; it does not assert that the global module Γ(D) is free over C∞(M).

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The annihilator bundle of a distribution

Definition

Let D be a smooth distribution on M. Its annihilator bundle is the subset

D∘:={α∈T∗M:α(v)=0 for every v∈Dπ(α)}.

Equivalently, the fibre over p is the annihilator subspace Dp∘⊆Tp∗M.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The double annihilator recovers a finite-rank distribution

Statement

Let D be a smooth distribution on M. Then the fibrewise double annihilator satisfies

(D∘)∘=D.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A smooth distribution D on M.

[A1]

Work on a neighborhood where D has a local frame X1,…,Xk extended to a frame X1,…,Xn of TM.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Relative to the dual coframe ω1,…,ωn, the annihilator [given] bundle is locally spanned by ωk+1,…,ωn, because those and only those covectors vanish on the span of X1,…,Xk.

1.2givenalgebra

A tangent vector v=∑iaiXi is annihilated by every section of [given] D∘ exactly when ak+1=⋯=an=0. Thus the double annihilator fibre is the span of X1,…,Xk, which is precisely D.

2.1given∎

Since the argument is pointwise and valid in every such neighborhood, [given] (D∘)∘=D as a subbundle of TM.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Integral manifolds of a distribution

Definition

Let D be a smooth distribution on M. A connected injectively immersed submanifold i:N→M is an integral manifold of D when

diq(TqN)=Di(q)

for every q∈N.

This definition uses the intrinsic manifold structure on N; the image i(N)⊆M need not carry the subspace topology.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Integrable distributions

Definition

A rank-k smooth distribution D on M is integrable when every point p∈M lies on an integral manifold i:N→M of D with dim⁡N=k.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Integral manifolds have the distribution dimension

Statement

Let D be a rank-k smooth distribution on M, and let i:N→M be an integral manifold of D. Then dim⁡N=k.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A rank-k smooth distribution D and an integral manifold i:N→M of D.

[A1]

For every q∈N, the image of diq equals Di(q).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Because i is an immersion, each diq:TqN→Ti(q)M is injective. [given] Since i is integral, its image is Di(q), which has dimension k. Therefore dim⁡TqN=k for every q∈N.

2.1given∎

The dimension of a manifold is the common dimension of its tangent spaces, [given] so dim⁡N=k.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Local diffeomorphisms carry distributions and integral manifolds

Statement

Let F:M→N be a local diffeomorphism, let D be a smooth distribution on M, and let U⊆M be open such that F∣U:U→V:=F(U) is a diffeomorphism. Then:

  1. the family (F∗D)F(p):=dFp(Dp)(p∈U) is a smooth distribution on V, and
  2. if i:P→U is an integral manifold of D∣U, then F∘i:P→V is an integral manifold of F∗D.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A local diffeomorphism F:M→N, a smooth distribution D on M, and an open set U on which F is a diffeomorphism onto V.

[A1]

Let i:P→U be an integral manifold of D∣U.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Because F∣U is a diffeomorphism, its differential identifies [given] TU→TV fibrewise by linear isomorphisms. Transporting the rank-k subbundle D∣U through those isomorphisms yields a rank-k smooth subbundle of TV, namely F∗D.

1.2givenalgebra

The composite F∘i is an injective immersion, because both factors [given] are immersions and F∣U is injective. For each q∈P, d(F∘i)q(TqP)=dFi(q)(diq(TqP))=dFi(q)(Di(q))=(F∗D)F(i(q)). Hence F∘i is an integral manifold of the transported distribution.

2.1given∎

Therefore local diffeomorphisms preserve the regular-distribution and [given] integral-manifold structure on any neighborhood where they are genuine diffeomorphisms.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Involutive distributions

Definition

A smooth distribution D on M is involutive when

X,Y∈Γ(D)  ⟹  [X,Y]∈Γ(D).

That is, the smooth vector fields tangent to D are closed under the Lie bracket.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Involutivity can be checked on a local frame

Statement

Let D be a smooth distribution. Then D is involutive if and only if every point has a neighborhood U with a local frame X1,…,Xk of D∣U such that

[Xi,Xj]∈Γ(D∣U)for all i,j.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A smooth distribution D.

[A1]

Fix a neighborhood U with local frame X1,…,Xk of D∣U.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

If D is involutive, then every bracket of tangent vector fields is tangent, so in particular every bracket [Xi,Xj] is tangent on U.

1.2givenalgebra

Conversely, assume all frame brackets are tangent on U. Any tangent fields on U have the form X=∑ifiXi and Y=∑jgjXj with smooth coefficients. Expanding [X,Y] with the Leibniz rule expresses the bracket as a sum of terms involving the tangent fields [Xi,Xj] and the frame fields Xi, hence again as a tangent field.

2.1given∎

Since this holds on a neighborhood of every point, D is involutive exactly when one may check bracket closure on a local frame.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Integrable distributions are involutive

Statement

Every integrable smooth distribution is involutive.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A smooth integrable distribution D on M.

[A1]

Let X,Y∈Γ(D) and let p∈M.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

By integrability, the point p lies on a connected integral manifold [given] i:N→M of D having the same dimension as the distribution. After shrinking near the point of N over p, the immersion may be viewed as an embedding, so X and Y restrict to smooth vector fields X~ and Y~ on that local piece of N.

1.2given

Along that local integral manifold, the fields X~ and [given] Y~ are i-related to X and Y. Therefore their Lie bracket is i-related to [X,Y]. Since the bracket on N is tangent to N, the value [X,Y]p lies in the image of di, which is Dp.

2.1given∎

The point p and the tangent fields X,Y were arbitrary, so [given] [X,Y]∈Γ(D). Hence D is involutive.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

An involutive local frame can be reduced to one field plus commuting transverse fields

Statement

Let D be an involutive rank-k distribution on M, and let X1,…,Xk be a local frame near p with X1(p)≠0. Then, after shrinking the neighborhood, there exist local sections Y2,…,Yk∈Γ(D) such that

  1. X1,Y2,…,Yk is a local frame of D, and
  2. each Yj is tangent to the flow-box slices for X1, and
  3. [X1,Yj]=0 for j=2,…,k.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An involutive rank-k distribution D and a local frame X1,…,Xk near p with X1(p)≠0.

[A1]

Shrink to a flow-box neighborhood for X1.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenconstruct

By the flow-box theorem there are local coordinates [given] (t,u2,…,un) centered at p in which X1=∂t. Shrinking if necessary, write Xj=aj∂t+∑m=2nbjm∂um(2≤j≤k) and define Zj:=Xj−ajX1=∑m=2nbjm∂um. Then each Zj is tangent to D, has no ∂t-component, and X1,Z2,…,Zk still form a local frame of D.

1.2givenconstruct

Because D is involutive, each bracket [X1,Zj] is tangent to [given] D. It also has no ∂t-component, since X1=∂t and Zj has none. Therefore there are smooth functions cjℓ such that [X1,Zj]=∑ℓ=2kcjℓZℓ(2≤j≤k). For each fixed transverse coordinate, solve the matrix ODE ∂tB=−CTB,B(0,u)=Ik−1, where C=(cjℓ). After shrinking again, the solution matrix B is smooth and invertible.

1.3givenalgebra

For j=2,…,k, set Yj:=∑ℓ=2kBℓjZℓ. Because [given] the Yj are invertible linear combinations of Z2,…,Zk, the fields X1,Y2,…,Yk form a local frame of D. Using the Leibniz rule for brackets with function coefficients and the differential equation for B, one gets [X1,Yj]=∑ℓ=2k(∂tBℓj)Zℓ+∑ℓ=2kBℓj[X1,Zℓ]=0. Hence each Yj commutes with X1.

2.1given∎

Therefore, after shrinking the neighborhood, there is a local frame [given] X1,Y2,…,Yk of D with [X1,Yj]=0 for all j≥2.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Commuting independent vector fields give a coordinate system

Statement

Let X1,…,Xk be smooth vector fields on an n-manifold M, defined near p, pointwise linearly independent there, and satisfying [Xi,Xj]=0 for all i,j. Then there are local coordinates (x1,…,xn) near p such that

Xi=∂∂xi(1≤i≤k).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Commuting smooth vector fields X1,…,Xk near p that are linearly independent at p.

[A1]

Choose a local submanifold S through p transverse to the span of the Xi.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenconstruct

Let Φi be the local flow of Xi. Because the fields commute, their [given] local flows commute pairwise. Define F(t1,…,tk,s):=Φt11∘⋯∘Φtkk(s) for (t,s) near (0,p) with s∈S. This map is smooth.

1.2given

The differential of F at (0,p) sends the coordinate vector [given] ∂ti to Xi(p) and the tangent space of S identically into a complement of their span. Hence dF(0,p) is an isomorphism. By the inverse function theorem, after shrinking domains, F is a local diffeomorphism.

2.1given∎

In the resulting coordinates, changing only ti applies the Xi-flow, [given] so the pushforward of ∂ti is exactly Xi. Renaming the source coordinates as (x1,…,xn) gives the desired chart.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Frobenius local coordinate theorem

Statement

Let D be a rank-k smooth distribution on an n-manifold M. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. D is integrable.
  2. D is involutive.

When these conditions hold, every point p∈M has a coordinate neighborhood (x1,…,xn) in which

D=span⁡ ⁣(∂∂x1,…,∂∂xk).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A rank-k smooth distribution D on M and a point p∈M.

[A1]

Assume first that D is integrable.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

If D is integrable, then it is involutive by the necessity [given] proposition. This proves 1 => 2.

1.2givencases

Now assume D is involutive. For k=0 the distribution is [given] zero, and for k=n it is all of TM, so the displayed coordinate form is immediate. Thus only the case 1≤k<n needs work.

1.3givenconstruct

Choose a local frame X1,…,Xk of D near p with [given] X1(p)≠0. By the frame-reduction lemma, after shrinking there are local sections Y2,…,Yk such that X1,Y2,…,Yk frames D, each Yj is tangent to the slices of a flow-box chart for X1, and [X1,Yj]=0 for all j≥2. Let S be the slice x1=0 in that flow-box chart, and write Vj:=Yj∣S. Then V2,…,Vk are pointwise independent vector fields on the (n−1)-manifold S. Because [Yi,Yj]∈Γ(D) and each Yj is tangent to the slices, the restrictions [Vi,Vj]=[Yi,Yj]∣S lie in the span of V2,…,Vk. Hence those Vj span an involutive rank-(k−1) distribution on S.

1.4givenconstruct

Apply the theorem inductively on the rank to that distribution on S. [given] There are local coordinates (x2,…,xk,xk+1,…,xn) on S in which span⁡(V2,…,Vk)=span⁡(∂x2,…,∂xk). Extend these coordinates off S by keeping them constant along the X1-flow, and use the flow parameter as x1. Then X1=∂x1. Since each Yj commutes with X1, its coefficients in these flow-box coordinates are constant along the X1-flow, so the span identity on S extends to span⁡(Y2,…,Yk)=span⁡(∂x2,…,∂xk). Therefore D=span⁡(∂x1,…,∂xk) on a neighborhood of p.

1.5givenconstruct

In those coordinates, the slices with [given] xk+1,…,xn fixed are integral manifolds of D. Thus the involutive case is integrable, proving 2 => 1.

2.1given∎

Hence integrability and involutivity are equivalent, and in the involutive [given] case the distribution is locally flat in coordinates as stated.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Frobenius gives local first integrals

Statement

Let D be an involutive rank-k distribution on an n-manifold M. Then near every point there is a submersion F=(fk+1,…,fn) onto an open set of Rn−k such that

D=ker⁡dF.

Equivalently, the functions fk+1,…,fn are local first integrals for D.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An involutive rank-k distribution D and a point p∈M.

[A1]

Choose Frobenius coordinates around p.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenconstruct

In Frobenius coordinates (x1,…,xn), the distribution is spanned by ∂x1,…,∂xk. Define F(x1,…,xn):=(xk+1,…,xn). Its differential has rank n−k, so F is a submersion.

1.2givenalgebra

A tangent vector lies in ker⁡dF exactly when its last n−k coordinate components vanish, so precisely when it is a linear combination of ∂x1,…,∂xk. Hence ker⁡dF=D.

2.1given∎

Therefore every involutive distribution is locally the common kernel of n−k smooth first integrals.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The kernel distribution of a constant-rank submersion is integrable

Statement

Let F:M→N be a smooth submersion. Then the kernel distribution ker⁡dF⊆TM is integrable, and its maximal connected integral manifolds are the connected components of the level sets of F.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A smooth submersion F:M→N.

[A1]

Fix p∈M and write q:=F(p).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Because F is a submersion, q is a regular value and the level set [given] F−1(q) is an embedded submanifold. Its tangent space at each point is the kernel of the differential of F. Therefore each connected component of F−1(q) is an integral manifold of ker⁡dF.

1.2given

Repeating the same argument at every point of M shows that each point [given] lies on such a connected component, so ker⁡dF is integrable. Since an integral manifold of ker⁡dF stays inside one level set of F, the maximal connected integral manifolds are exactly the connected components of the fibres.

2.1given∎

Hence the kernel of a submersion is integrable with leaves equal to fibre [given] components.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Level-set distributions are involutive

Statement

Let F:M→Rr be smooth, and let Dp:=ker⁡dFp for each p∈M. Then every smooth vector field tangent to D is closed under Lie bracket; in particular, when D has constant rank it is involutive.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A smooth map F:M→Rr.

[A1]

Let X and Y be smooth vector fields with values in ker⁡dF.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Write F=(f1,…,fr). The tangency assumption says [given] X(fa)=0=Y(fa) for every component fa.

1.2givenalgebra

Therefore [given] [X,Y](fa)=X(Y(fa))−Y(X(fa))=0 for every a. This means dF([X,Y])=0, so [X,Y] is again tangent to the kernel family.

2.1given∎

Thus kernel distributions are closed under brackets whenever they are [given] defined as smooth distributions.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Flat charts for a distribution

Definition

Let D be a rank-k smooth distribution on an n-manifold M. A chart φ:U→Rk×Rn−k is a flat chart for D when

Dq=dφq−1(Rk×{0})(q∈U).

Equivalently, in the coordinates φ=(x,y) the distribution is spanned by the first k coordinate vector fields.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Plaques of a flat chart

Definition

Let φ=(x,y):U→Rk×Rn−k be a flat chart for a distribution D. For c in the second-coordinate image, the connected components of

φ−1(φ(U)∩(Rk×{c}))

are called the plaques of the flat chart.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Integral manifolds are locally contained in plaques

Statement

Let D be an integrable rank-k distribution, let φ=(x,y):U→Rk×Rn−k be a flat chart for D, and let i:N→M be a connected integral manifold of D. Then each connected component of i−1(U) is mapped by i into a single plaque of U.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A flat chart φ=(x,y) and a connected integral manifold i:N→M.

[A1]

Let C be a connected component of i−1(U).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

The transverse coordinate map y∘i:C→Rn−k has zero [given] differential. Indeed, the tangent image of i is D, and in a flat chart the distribution is exactly the kernel of dy.

1.2given

A smooth map with zero differential is locally constant, hence constant on [given] each connected component of its domain. Therefore y∘i is constant on C.

2.1given∎

The image i(C) is therefore contained in the slice with that fixed [given] transverse coordinate, namely in a single plaque of the flat chart.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Overlapping plaques through a point have compatible germs

Statement

Let P1 and P2 be plaques from flat charts of the same integrable distribution, and suppose p∈P1∩P2. Then there is a neighborhood W of p in M such that

P1∩W=P2∩W.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Two plaques P1 and P2 through the same point p.

[A1]

Each plaque is itself a local integral manifold of the distribution.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Apply the previous lemma to the connected integral manifold P1 inside a [given] flat chart producing P2. Near p, the set P1 must lie in the plaque of that chart through p, namely in P2.

1.2given

Reversing the roles of P1 and P2 gives the opposite inclusion on [given] possibly smaller neighborhoods. Intersecting those neighborhoods yields an open set W with P1∩W=P2∩W.

2.1given

Thus plaques through the same point determine the same germ. [given] ∎

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The leaf equivalence relation of an integrable distribution

Definition

Let D be an integrable distribution on M. For p,q∈M, write p∼Dq when there is a piecewise smooth curve γ:[0,1]→M with γ(0)=p, γ(1)=q, and γ′(t)∈Dγ(t) at every differentiable point.

This relation is called the leaf equivalence relation of D.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Tangent-curve reachability is an equivalence relation

Statement

For an integrable distribution D, the relation ∼D is an equivalence relation on M.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integrable distribution D on M.

[A1]

The relation is defined by piecewise smooth curves tangent to D.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Reflexivity holds because the constant curve at any point is piecewise [given] smooth and has derivative 0∈D.

1.2given

Symmetry holds because reversing a tangent piecewise smooth curve negates [given] its derivative but keeps it inside the same linear subspaces.

1.3givenconstruct

Transitivity holds because concatenating two tangent piecewise smooth curves [given] produces another piecewise smooth curve with the same tangency property.

2.1given

Therefore ∼D is an equivalence relation. [given] ∎

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Existence and uniqueness of maximal connected integral manifolds

Statement

Let D be an integrable rank-k distribution on a manifold M, and let Lp be the ∼D-equivalence class of a point p. Then:

  1. Lp carries a unique smooth structure for which the inclusion jp:Lp↪M is a connected injective immersion and an integral manifold of D.
  2. If i:N→M is any connected integral manifold of D with i(q)=p for some q∈N, then there is a unique smooth map Φ:N→Lp such that jp∘Φ=i.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integrable rank-k distribution D and a point p∈M.

[A1]

Let Lp be the reachability class of p under tangent piecewise smooth curves.

[L1]

An integrable distribution has a flat coordinate chart around every point (Frobenius local coordinate theorem).

[L2]

Plaques from two flat charts through the same point have compatible germs (Overlapping plaques through a point have compatible germs).

[L3]

Each connected component of the inverse image of a flat-chart domain under an integral immersion maps into one plaque (Integral manifolds are locally contained in plaques).

[L4]

A map between equal-dimensional Euclidean open sets with invertible derivative is a local diffeomorphism (The Euclidean inverse function theorem).

[A2]

The standing ACω assumption for smooth distributions is available (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[L6]

Under ACω, every second-countable space is Lindelof (Assuming countable choice, every second countable space is Lindelöf).

[L7]

The connected components of a topological manifold are open and form an at most countable family (Components of a topological manifold are open and at most countable).

[L8]

Under ACω, a countable union of at most countable sets is at most countable (Countable unions of at most countable sets, assuming ACω).

[L9]

A connected locally path-connected space is path connected (A connected, locally path-connected space is path-connected, because its path components are open); in particular, each plaque is path connected in its Euclidean slice coordinates (Plaques of a flat chart).

[L10]

A smooth real-valued function with zero differential is constant on each connected component (A smooth function with zero differential is constant on each connected component).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1A1A2L1L5L6L9givenchoose

By [L1], restrictions of flat charts to coordinate boxes form an open cover of M. By [L5], [L6], and [A2], choose a countable such cover (Um,φm)m∈N. A plaque through a point of Lp lies in Lp: [L9] joins its points within the plaque, and its tangent spaces are D. Hence the plaques of the chosen cover that meet Lp cover Lp.

1.2A1L3L7given

Let i:N→M be a connected integral manifold with i(q)=p, and put S=i−1(Lp). For r∈N, choose a flat-chart domain U about i(r) and let C be the connected component of i−1(U) containing r. By [L7], C is an open neighborhood of r, and [L3] maps it into one plaque. If r∈S, that plaque lies in Lp; if r∉S, it lies in a different reachability class. Thus S and its complement are open. Since N is connected and q∈S, one has S=N, so i(N)⊆Lp.

2.1A1A2L3L7L8L9L10step 1.1

Fix one chosen-cover plaque P0 through p. If a chosen-cover plaque P lies in Lp, then for each m the components of P∩Um, viewed in the intrinsic Euclidean-slice topology of P, form an at most countable family by [L7]. Applying [L3] to the plaque inclusion shows that each such component lies in one plaque of Um, so P meets at most countably many chosen-cover plaques. By [L8], the same is true across all m. Starting from P0, take all neighbors at each finite stage and then the union over the countably many finite stages; [L8] makes the resulting family Pp at most countable. Every member lies in Lp by [L9]. Conversely, on each smooth segment of a tangent path the transverse flat-chart coordinates have zero derivative and are constant by [L10], so the path is locally contained in a chosen-cover plaque. Compactness of its parameter interval gives a finite plaque subdivision from P0 to a plaque containing its endpoint. Hence Pp covers Lp.

3.1L2L5L8step 2.1construct

Give each P∈Pp its Euclidean slice coordinates. By [L2], overlapping plaque coordinates have smooth transition maps, so these patches form a smooth atlas. It is countable by step 2.1, and each Euclidean patch has a countable basis, so [L8] makes the induced topology second countable. The inclusion jp is continuous and injective in these patches; since M is Hausdorff by [L5], distinct points of Lp have disjoint inverse-image neighborhoods, so the induced topology is Hausdorff. It is locally Euclidean by construction. Therefore it is a smooth k-manifold, and in plaque coordinates jp is an injective immersion with tangent image D.

4.1A1step 2.1step 3.1

The class Lp is path connected in this topology: a tangent path from p to any of its points admits the finite plaque subdivision used in step 2.1, and is continuous in each plaque chart. Hence jp:Lp↪M is a connected integral manifold.

4.2L3step 1.2step 3.1

The equation jp∘Φ=i now forces a unique set map Φ:N→Lp. For any flat-chart domain U, [L3] maps each connected component of i−1(U) into one plaque, and in that plaque chart Φ has the same coordinate expression as i. Hence Φ is smooth, and uniqueness follows from injectivity of jp.

4.3L3L4step 2.1step 3.1

It remains to prove uniqueness of the smooth structure. If k=0, every plaque and hence the connected leaf Lp is the singleton {p}, which has only its unique zero-manifold structure. Assume k≥1 and let another smooth structure on Lp make jp a connected integral injective immersion. By [L3], every point has a connected neighborhood in that alternative structure whose image lies in one plaque of step 3.1. The coordinate expression of jp from that neighborhood to the plaque is between k-manifolds and has invertible derivative because both tangent images equal D; [L4] makes it a local diffeomorphism. Thus the alternative charts and the plaque charts are smoothly compatible in both directions, so the structures coincide.

5.1step 1.2step 3.1step 4.1step 4.2step 4.3∎

Steps 3.1 and 4.1 give the asserted connected integral leaf structure, steps 1.2 and 4.2 give the universal factorization, and step 4.3 proves uniqueness; consequently Lp is the unique maximal connected integral manifold through p.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Maximal integral manifolds partition the manifold

Statement

If D is an integrable distribution on M, then its maximal connected integral manifolds form a partition of M.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integrable distribution D on M.

[A1]

Maximal leaves are the equivalence classes of the leaf relation.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

Every point of M lies in its own equivalence class, so the union of the [given] maximal leaves is all of M.

1.2given

Distinct equivalence classes are disjoint. Therefore distinct maximal [given] connected integral manifolds are disjoint.

2.1given

Hence the maximal connected integral manifolds partition M. [given] ∎

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Regular foliation atlases

Definition

A regular foliation atlas of codimension n−k on an n-manifold M is an atlas of charts φα=(xα,yα):Uα→Rk×Rn−k such that on each overlap the transition map has the form

(xβ,yβ)=(gβα(xα,yα),hβα(yα)).

Thus the second coordinates depend only on the old transverse coordinates, so plaques are sent to plaques.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Leaves of a regular foliation

Definition

Given a regular foliation atlas on M, call each connected component of a slice

φ−1(φ(U)∩(Rk×{c}))

an atlas plaque. Declare two points equivalent when they can be joined by a finite chain of atlas plaques in which consecutive plaques intersect. A leaf is an equivalence class for this plaque-chain relation. Thus a leaf is the underlying subset obtained by continuing one local plaque through overlapping foliation charts, not an arbitrary connected union of distinct leaves. This item defines only that underlying subset; it does not yet assign the subset an intrinsic smooth manifold structure.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Regular foliations and integrable distributions correspond

Statement

On an n-manifold M, regular foliations of leaf dimension k and integrable rank-k distributions determine each other:

  1. a regular foliation atlas defines an integrable tangent distribution;
  2. an integrable rank-k distribution defines a regular foliation atlas whose leaves are its maximal connected integral manifolds.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Either a regular foliation atlas of leaf dimension k or an integrable rank-k distribution on M.

[A1]

In foliation charts and flat charts, plaques are the local leaf pieces.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenconstruct

In a regular foliation chart (x,y), declare the tangent distribution to [given] be the span of ∂x1,…,∂xk. Because overlap maps send plaque directions to plaque directions, these local k-planes patch to a smooth rank-k distribution. Plaques are local integral manifolds, so the distribution is integrable.

1.2givenconstruct

Conversely, let D be an integrable rank-k distribution. By the [given] local Frobenius theorem, every point has a flat chart (x,y) for D. Choose a covering by sufficiently small restrictions of these charts, refining overlap domains into plaque-coordinate neighborhoods. On each such overlap the new transverse coordinate has differential zero in every old plaque direction, so it is locally a function only of the old transverse coordinate. The refined charts therefore have transitions of the form required by a regular foliation atlas. This asserts existence of a compatible refined atlas; it does not claim that every unrestricted flat chart belongs to one common atlas.

1.3given

In that atlas the plaques are precisely the local integral pieces of [given] D, so the global leaves are exactly the maximal connected integral manifolds. The two constructions therefore recover one another.

2.1given

Thus regular foliations and integrable distributions correspond. [given] ∎

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Every connected tangent map meeting a leaf factors uniquely through that leaf

Statement

Let D be an integrable distribution on M, let L be one of its maximal leaves, and let F:P→M be a smooth map from a connected manifold P such that dF(TP)⊆D and F(P) meets L. Then:

  1. F(P)⊆L, and
  2. there is a unique smooth map F~:P→L with j∘F~=F, where j:L↪M is the inclusion.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A connected manifold P, a smooth map F:P→M tangent to an integrable distribution D, and a maximal leaf L meeting F(P).

[A1]

Let U:=F−1(L).

[L1]

An integrable distribution has a flat coordinate chart around every point (Frobenius local coordinate theorem).

[L2]

A smooth real-valued function with zero differential is constant on each connected component (A smooth function with zero differential is constant on each connected component).

[L3]

A maximal leaf has the unique smooth structure constructed from its local plaque charts, and its inclusion in M is an injective integral immersion (Existence and uniqueness of maximal connected integral manifolds).

[L4]
[L5]

The connected components of a flat-coordinate slice are its plaques (Plaques of a flat chart).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1A1L1L2L5given

The set U is nonempty by hypothesis. If x∈U, use [L1] to choose a flat chart φ=(u,v):W→Rk×Rn−k around F(x), and choose a connected coordinate neighborhood C of x contained in the open set F−1(W). On C, each component of v∘F has zero differential because dF(TP)⊆D=ker⁡dv, so [L2] makes v∘F constant. Thus [L5] puts F(C) in the plaque through F(x), which lies in L. Hence C⊆U, and U is open.

2.1A1L1L2L4L5step 1.1

If x∈P∖U, the same [L1]–[L2] argument gives a connected open neighborhood C of x whose image lies in one plaque and hence one leaf. That leaf is not L, because it contains F(x)∉L, so C⊆P∖U. Thus P∖U is open. Now U is a nonempty clopen subset of the connected space P, so [L4] gives U=P and therefore F(P)⊆L.

3.1L1L2L3L5step 1.1step 2.1

The inclusion j is injective by [L3], so step 2.1 forces a unique set map F~:P→L with j∘F~=F. Around each x∈P, repeat the flat-chart argument of step 1.1 to obtain a connected neighborhood whose image lies in one plaque. That plaque is a smooth coordinate patch of L by [L3], and in its plaque coordinates F~ has the same smooth coordinate expression as F. Hence F~ is smooth, and injectivity of j gives uniqueness.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1∎

Therefore every connected tangent map that meets a leaf factors uniquely through that leaf.

PropositionStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Embedded leaves need not be closed and leaves need not be embedded

Statement

There are regular foliations for which one leaf is embedded but not closed in the ambient manifold, and there are regular foliations for which one leaf is an injectively immersed submanifold that is not embedded.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Standard one-dimensional foliations on an annulus and on the two-torus.

[A1]

Use the spiral field on an annulus and the irrational linear flow on the torus.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1given

On the annulus A={(r,θ):1/2<r<3/2}, the vector field [given] X=∂θ+(r−1)2∂r is nowhere zero, so its integral curves form a regular one-dimensional foliation. The circle r=1 is one leaf, and every nearby noncircular leaf is a non-self-intersecting spiral whose closure contains that circle. Such a spiral leaf is embedded but not closed in A.

1.2given

On the torus T2=R2/Z2, the constant vector [given] field generated by (1,α) with irrational α gives a regular foliation by injectively immersed images of R. Each leaf is dense in T2, hence cannot be embedded.

2.1given∎

Therefore global Frobenius theory correctly concludes only that leaves are [given] injectively immersed; neither closedness nor embeddedness is automatic.

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Every constant-dimensional family of tangent subspaces is a smooth distribution

Statement

Every constant-dimensional family of tangent subspaces is a smooth distribution.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: On R2, define D(x,y):={span⁡(∂x),y>0,span⁡(∂x+∂y),y≤0.

[A1]

This is a one-dimensional family of tangent lines.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1given

The family has constant dimension 1 at every point.

1.2given

If it were a smooth distribution near the origin, it would admit a local [given] nonvanishing smooth spanning field. Above the x-axis that field would have to be tangent to ∂x, while below the axis it would have to be tangent to ∂x+∂y. Continuity at the origin would then force the two line directions to agree there, which they do not.

2.1given∎

Therefore constant fibre dimension alone does not imply smoothness.

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Every smooth distribution is integrable

Statement

Every smooth distribution is integrable.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: On R3, let X1:=∂x+y∂z,X2:=∂y, and let D:=span⁡(X1,X2).

[A1]

This is the standard contact plane field.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1given

The fields X1 and X2 are smooth and pointwise independent, so [given] D is a smooth rank-2 distribution.

1.2givenalgebra

Their bracket is [given] [X1,X2]=−∂z, which does not lie in the span of X1 and X2 at any point. Hence the distribution is not involutive.

1.3given

A rank-2 integral manifold would force brackets of tangent vector fields [given] to remain tangent, so such manifolds cannot realize this distribution. Thus the distribution is smooth but not integrable.

2.1given

Therefore the universal statement is false. [given] ∎

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The ambient value of a Lie bracket is determined by the two pointwise vector values

Statement

For smooth vector fields X and Y, the ambient tangent vector [X,Y]p is determined by the pair of pointwise values (Xp,Yp).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: On R2 at p=(0,0), let X:=∂x,Y:=x∂y,Z:=0.

[A1]

The fields Y and Z have the same value at p.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1given

At the origin, Yp=0=Zp, while Xp=∂x.

1.2givenalgebra

Nevertheless, [given] [X,Y]=∂yand[X,Z]=0, so the Lie bracket at p changes when one replaces Y by another field with the same point value.

1.3given

Thus the ambient vector [X,Y]p∈TpM is not determined by the two [given] pointwise vector values: first derivatives of the fields matter. This does not rule out quotient-valued constructions that use a fixed smooth distribution; it refutes only the ambient pointwise-value claim stated above.

2.1given

Therefore the stated pointwise-determination claim is false. [given] ∎

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Every leaf of a regular foliation is an embedded submanifold

Statement

Every leaf of a regular foliation is an embedded submanifold.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An irrational α and, on the standard torus T2=R2/Z2, the constant distribution D spanned by the image of (1,α).

[L1]

The quotient R2/Z2 is the two-torus, with the product topology and its standard product smooth structure (The two-dimensional torus T2=(R/Z)2, Products of smooth manifolds have a canonical product smooth structure).

[L2]

An integrable rank-one distribution determines a regular foliation whose leaves are its maximal connected integral manifolds (Regular foliations and integrable distributions correspond).

[L3]

For an integrable distribution, the leaf through a point is its tangent-curve reachability class and carries the unique maximal connected integral-manifold structure (The leaf equivalence relation of an integrable distribution, Existence and uniqueness of maximal connected integral manifolds).

[L4]

Every real number has an integer part ⌊x⌋ satisfying ⌊x⌋≤x<⌊x⌋+1 (Integer part: for every real x there is exactly one integer m with m≤x<m+1).

[L5]

The real numbers are Archimedean (Every complete ordered field is Archimedean).

[L6]

Among N+1 objects placed in N classes, two lie in the same class (The pigeonhole principle on N).

[L7]

A one-dimensional embedded submanifold of a two-manifold is locally an ambient coordinate line (Embedded submanifolds and slice charts).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1L1L2L3givenalgebra

On every lifted quotient chart, the linear coordinate r=y−αx is constant in the direction (1,α), so D is locally the span of a coordinate vector field and is integrable. By [L2] it determines a regular foliation. Its integral curve through [0] is γ(t)=[(t,αt)]. Conversely, a piecewise smooth tangent curve lifts locally with derivative h(t)(1,α), so each lifted segment has displacement parallel to (1,α); summing the segments shows that every endpoint reachable from [0] lies in γ(R). Thus [L3] identifies γ(R) with the leaf through [0].

1.2givenalgebra

The derivative of the lifted curve is the nonzero vector (1,α), so γ is an immersion. If γ(s)=γ(t), then t−s and α(t−s) are integers. Irrationality of α forces t−s=0, so γ is injective.

1.3L4L5L6givenchoosealgebra

Fix ε>0. By [L5], choose a positive integer N with 1/N<ε. Put rm=mα−⌊mα⌋∈[0,1) for 0≤m≤N. Partition [0,1) into the N half-open intervals of length 1/N. By [L6], two distinct rm,rl lie in one interval; after interchanging them if necessary, 0<δ:=rl−rm<1/N, where positivity follows because equality would make (l−m)α an integer. For the nonzero integer q=l−m, one has qα≡δ(modZ).

2.1L1L4step 1.3algebra

Fix [(u,v)]∈T2 and let w∈[0,1) represent the class of v−αu. With j=⌊w/δ⌋, [L4] gives 0≤w−jδ<δ. Set n=jq and t=u+n. Then [(t,αt)]=[(u,αu+jδ)], which is within ε of [(u,v)] in a product quotient chart. Since the point and ε were arbitrary, the origin leaf is dense in T2.

3.1L1L7step 2.1

This leaf has dimension 1 in the 2-manifold T2. If it were embedded, [L7] would give an ambient chart in which its intersection with the chart domain is a coordinate line, which is not dense in that domain. But step 2.1 makes the leaf's intersection with every nonempty open chart domain dense there, a contradiction. Hence the leaf is not embedded.

4.1step 1.1step 3.1∎

Thus a regular foliation has a nonembedded leaf, so the universal statement is false.

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

The subspace topology on a leaf is always its manifold topology

Statement

The subspace topology on a leaf is always its manifold topology.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Use the irrational linear leaf t↦[(t,αt)]⊂T2 with irrational α.

[A1]

Intrinsically, the leaf is diffeomorphic to R.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1given

As an immersed manifold, the leaf carries the topology transported from [given] R by its parametrization.

1.2given

If the subspace topology from T2 agreed with that intrinsic [given] topology, the parametrization would be a topological embedding. The leaf would then be an embedded submanifold of the torus.

1.3given

But the same irrational leaf is dense and not embedded. Therefore its [given] subspace topology cannot equal its manifold topology.

2.1given

Hence the statement is false. [given] ∎

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05Open item page →

Frobenius applies to any variable-rank family of subspaces

Statement

Frobenius applies to any variable-rank family of subspaces.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: On R, let Dx:={{0},x=0,TxR,x≠0.

[A1]

The rank jumps from 0 at the origin to 1 elsewhere.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1given

This family is not a smooth distribution in the regular sense, because a [given] smooth distribution is by definition a smooth vector subbundle of constant rank.

1.2given

Since the regular Frobenius theorem starts from smooth constant-rank [given] distributions, its hypotheses do not even apply to this variable-rank family.

2.1given∎

Therefore the statement is false: singular families require a different [given] theory.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources